British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Monday unveiled plans for one of the world’s most restrictive online child-safety regimes, proposing a ban on social media use by children under 16 and a broader set of restrictions on gaming, livestreaming and other digital platforms. The proposal would place the U.K. at the forefront of a growing international effort to regulate children’s access to online services, while raising significant questions about enforcement, privacy and effectiveness.
Starmer described the initiative as an effort to “give kids their childhood back,” per Reuters, arguing that social media companies have failed to adequately protect young users from harmful content, addictive design features and unwanted contact with adults. The plan would apply to major platforms including TikTok, Instagram, X, Facebook, YouTube and Snapchat, with implementation potentially beginning as early as next spring.
The proposal is being described by government officials as an “Australia plus” model, a reference to Australia’s landmark nationwide ban on social media access for children under 16 that took effect in December 2025. Australia’s law covers major platforms including TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, Reddit, Snapchat and X. British officials indicated the UK ban would cover a similar range of services while extending restrictions to additional online products and features.
Under the UK proposal, online services that fall outside the formal social media ban, including some gaming platforms, would face new requirements designed to prevent children from communicating with strangers. The government is also considering restrictions on features such as infinite scrolling, particularly during overnight hours, as well as limits on disappearing messages and location-sharing tools. Under-18s would additionally be prohibited from accessing romantic or sexual AI chatbot services.
The initiative reflects a broader shift in the UK government’s approach to online safety. Britain has already imposed increasingly stringent obligations on technology companies through the Online Safety Act and other measures, including recent restrictions aimed at preventing the circulation of nude images among children. The new proposal would likely require expanded age-verification systems across social media platforms, potentially relying on technologies already used by regulator Ofcom for age checks on adult-content websites.
Government officials say public support for stronger restrictions is substantial. According to responses to the government’s “Growing Up in the Online World” consultation, more than 90% of parents supported establishing a minimum age of 16 for access to social media platforms. Nearly 88% said such restrictions would reduce children’s exposure to harmful content, while many young respondents supported limiting high-risk platform features.
Yet the proposal has already drawn skepticism from researchers, child-safety advocates and the technology industry.
Read more: EU Consumer Groups File Complaints Against Google, Meta and TikTok Over Online Financial Scams
One of the central concerns is whether such a ban can be effectively enforced. Australia’s experience has become a key point of reference in that debate. Research Professor Amy Orben of the University of Cambridge told Reuters that enforcement of Australia’s ban remains incomplete and that many young people continue to access social media at rates similar to those before the restrictions.
Technology companies have likewise argued that blanket prohibitions could produce unintended consequences. Matthew Sinclair, the senior UK director of the Computer and Communications Industry Association, told the Guardian, “Blanket restrictions on features will stifle access to age-appropriate experiences with proper parental controls, encouraging children to seek out riskier unregulated alternatives.”
Other tech industry sources described what appeared to be a rushed and at times contradictory process to finalize the ban, with speculation that the government was concerned about legal action over any perceived procedural irregularities.
Some child-safety campaigners have also questioned whether a ban alone addresses the underlying risks posed by platform design. Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, called the proposal a “gamble on an unenforceable social media ban” that could leave parents with a false sense of security while failing to address core product-safety concerns, according to the Guardian.
Starmer has acknowledged that some children will inevitably circumvent the restrictions. Nonetheless, he argues that legislation can shape social expectations even when compliance is imperfect. “Laws are rules, but they’re also an expression of our values,” he said.
